Archive for: May 2017

The Position Statement of Greater Mading Aweil Diaspora Communities, USA, Canada & Australia on the Sacking of General Paul Malong Awan

Date: Monday, May 22nd, 2017

To: H.E. Salva Kiir Mayardit,
President of the Republic of South Sudan and
Commander in Chief of Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA)

ENCOURAGED by the conviction and resilience of our community in the face of uncertain future in this trying times in our beloved country,
RECALLING the contribution of our community throughout the liberation history to usher in South Sudan’s statehood on 9th July, 2011,
MINDFUL of the solemn obligation to making sure South Sudan’s statehood is protected and upheld,
COGNIZANT of the shared and selfless contributions for the birth of South Sudan among all ethnic groups, large and small, rich or poor and the diversity we must cherish,
BELIEVING in the shared desire to crave for fair treatment of people irrespective of their social, economic and political weights across the country,
PROUD of our community’s important place in collective construction of a nation united in the spirit of hard work, collaboration and shared vision,
HUMBLED by the opportunity accorded to members of our community in helping defend and protect the territorial integrity of the Republic of South Sudan with undivided loyalty to the leadership and the party,
PLEASED with the achievements and commitments of our cadres such as General Paul Malong Awan and his comrades in rising to the occasion for the cause they can do best: fight for the rights of all,
AWARE of President Salva Kiir Mayardit’s constitutional prerogative to appoint and relieve any competent citizen to and from national office,
THANKFUL for the show of leadership by the Western and Eastern Lakes Governments and communities in containing the unfortunate situation,

WE, the Greater Mading Aweil Diaspora Communities in USA, Canada and Australia, hereby make the following statement in relations to the above stated issue:

>>>At the outset, we would like to give special appreciation to the President of the Republic, General Salva Kiir Mayardit, for his long-running service to the people of South Sudan during and after the difficult war of liberation.
>>>We would also like to extend similar appreciation to all men and women in uniforms who stood firm to protect our nation from internal and external adversaries in order to preserve our nation’s sovereignty and the values we stand to uphold, especially at this historic 34th anniversary of the founding of the SPLM/SPLA.
>>>Equally important, we likewise congratulate one of our decorated sons, General James Ajongo Mawut on his appointment as a new Army Chief of Defense of the SPLA, Madam Jackline Nyibol Ajongo on her appointment as Deputy Secretary at SPLM National Secretariat and General Dau Aturjong on his reinstitution to active service within the SPLA.
>>>Furthermore, we would like to express our deep gratitude to the outgoing Chief of General Staff, General Paul Malong Awan for his consummate service to the nation during his tenure and in his previous assignments throughout the liberation.
>>>Gen. Malong deserves a special pat on the back or a medal of honor for having gracefully and caringly handled the delicate situation following his unceremonious discharge. He has already, in our humble view, won the admiration of many South Sudanese for such a rare demonstration of statesmanship.

Your Excellency, President Salva Kiir Mayardit,
We, the Greater Mading Aweil Diaspora Communities, feel obliged to partake in the ongoing discourse in South Sudan national crises: war, famine, and the recent near-crisis situation caused by the hasty sacking of Gen. Malong. >>>Contrary to the popular belief, we would like to dispel the wild assumption that Aweil community is aggrieved by the sacking of General Paul Malong. This is a mischaracterization of what we, as a community, stand for.
>>>Our community holds a conviction that any appointment made from within the community or anywhere in the country is never personalized. We also believe that any appointment or relief of any competent South Sudanese to or from national office should not be perceived as community affair.

>>>Indeed, General Malong is our son, but he is also a representative of all the people of South Sudan and this can be affirmed by the popular reception he received across the country when he returned to Juba. In terms of hearts and minds won over, we are quite sure that Gen. Malong is now richer, for he has gained more people after peaceably landing at Juba International Airport. His handling of the situation, to state the obvious, has endeared him to South Sudanese from all walks of life.

>>>Moreover, any appointments made at the national level are the prerogative of the President who has a constitutional authority to appoint and relieve any competent citizen. As a community, we strongly urge your honest reconciliation with General Paul Malong whose decade-long comradeship is too strong to be discarded over a one-time divergence of opinions.
>>>We believe that the near-crisis involving his sacking is a considered matter of your administration and should not be allowed to be exploited by war merchants, or ethno-regional players who, by any statistical measure, are rooting against the stability of the country.
>>>We thus call for calm among our communities while urging our elders and representatives in different August Houses to stand behind the reconciliation effort so that this matter is quickly put to rest. We understand why the leadership may feel unease to letting the sacked General go to his own village for a genuine rest. However, we feel that such concerns are premised on misread historical facts about our community’s commitment to peace and harmony. >>>Hence, and once you have reconciled with Gen. Malong Awan, it would be best to let him go and have sincere and deserved rest among his people or before his next assignment. After all Gen. Malong is still our overall community leader.

>>>Finally, our position as a community is that of peace and integrity of the country. We call upon you, Mr. President, to allow General Malong to exercise his freedoms, including freedom of movement to any place of his choice as a responsible citizen of this country.
>>>General Paul Malong will never contemplate any act of rebellion against the State because he comes from a community that shuns and abhors any act of rebellion. In other words, unqualified limits on his freedom of movements or residence may be counterproductive and antithetical to the values we cherish as collectively expressed in our National Anthem.
>>>On a more serious note, we urge you and your government to rally the support of every South Sudanese to help end the ongoing bloodshed in our country, rejuvenate the deteriorating economy and unite the people of South Sudan who continue to be polarized by the conflict. Together, we shall overcome!

Yours Sincerely,
Mr. Simon Angok
MAC-Australia President Signed:

Mr. Atelio Ater
President, Federation of Aweil Communities, Canada Signed:

Mr. Adim Malek
President, Aweil Community Association in USA Signed:

CC: Transitional National Legislative Assembly (TNLA)
CC: Transitional Legislative Assemblies of Aweil, Aweil East, and Lol States

Last Word on Kiir’s National Dialogue: It’s no dialogue but a mockery of it

BY: DANIEL JUOL NHOMNGEK, KAMPALA, UGANDA, MAY/27/2017, SSN;

The swearing in of a 94-member steering committee to head the national dialogue should not be a source of joy for all of us but rather we should be prepared for more crisis or even future war.

It is the missed opportunity as the President has again failed this time to do what is required for the national dialogue to be successful and to bring a permanent peace in a country facing war like South Sudan.

It is sad to blatantly state that the current national dialogue of President Kiir is not national dialogue when tested on common sense principle but rather it is something which is like a “national monologue,” which in my opinion is but a mockery.

This Dialogue established by President Kiir is a recipe for future war in South Sudan. This is because it will not bring permanent peace in the country. Though, the war may stop now, that does not mean that it is the current national dialogue that has brought peace but the war has just been postponed for future generation.

For that reason, it is sad to see the country being bogged down in vicious cycle of violence and to also see the liberator turned president losing sight of the long cherished principles of justice, liberty and prosperity in South Sudan.

In fact, for South Sudan to realize these principles, there must be someone who is solely concerned with the protection of the lives and welfare of South Sudanese but not power and wealth.

These are what are understood to be the ultimate aims of politics in South Sudan, which is contrary to the leaders that South Sudan wants.

Leaders that South Sudan wants as already stated in the above paragraph are selfless individuals whose goals and objectives are that of the country guided by the principles of justice, liberty and prosperity for all South Sudanese.

Failure to get the leaders of the type as described in this paragraph to run the country will keep the country on prolonged war and indefinite crisis.

Once the crises have been the order of the day in any country it will be hard to end them quickly. South Sudan has reached that state of unending crises and once the armed stage has been reached in any conflict, it is always difficult to stop it and the longer an armed struggle continues, the more difficult this becomes.

In the unending crises like the case of an internal armed conflict like what we see in the context of South Sudan, the only viable option to such crises is to engage in a process of negotiations, which is an essential step in finding a solution.

This article, therefore, is the last word on the President Kiir’s dialogue which is a mockery of national dialogue in its real sense.

The president in fact disguised his plan to frustrate all attempts to solve the conflict which may affect his personal interest to remain in power by coming up with this substandard national dialogue.

For the National Dialogue to be described as such, it must be unconditional, which lacks in the present national dialogue of President Kiir.

It was therefore a mistake for the President to establish the National dialogue and then restricted it in respect as to who should participate in it and who should not. Restricting it as such as witnessed in the case of Dr. Riek Machar who the President refused to participate was the beginning of the failure of the said national dialogue and we are wasting time and national resources on what is not going to be successful in the end.

As I have already stated above, this article is my last word in this regard is that the current President Kiir’s National Dialogue, which is not a national dialogue nor is it a national monologue as many call, but it’s a mockery of national dialogue.

I have stated here that it is not national dialogue because of the following reasons—
First all, for the national dialogue to bring permanent peace it must be inclusive. This means that all key interest groups such as women, youth, opponents or rebels in the case of South Sudan and other hated groups should be invited to take part in negotiation.

Because of a need to create trust and deeper understanding among all the participants, the process of national dialogue must begin as a political process. For the process to be deemed as political process it must be accepted by all parties that must be inclusive, transparent, and consultative in the preparatory phase that sets the foundation for a genuine national dialogue after that.

In relation to the above, the decision on how a national dialogue should be made by all the parties to the conflict as was the case in South Africa in 1990s. For example, before the National Dialogue was conducted in South Africa, the opposition parties were all invited and in response to invitation, they formed the “Convention for a Democratic South Africa” or CODESA, whose aim was to form part of a political negotiating process.

The CODESA, as a whole was divided into various working groups that worked on the preparation for national reconciliation, which took a period of two years i.e. 1991-2. These Working Groups met and negotiated frequently and after that they eventually delivered their reports on their agreements and recommendations.

This example from South Africa clearly illustrates the fact that the national dialogue is almost like the real political process that results into ordinary peace agreements as was seen in the case of Compromised Peace Agreement (the CPA), 2015.

Nonetheless, the only difference between the ordinary peace agreements and the national dialogues or national reconciliations is that whereas on one hand the former is negotiated between the warring parties only as seen in the case of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA), 2005, the national dialogue on the other hand, involves the whole nation.

Otherwise, the two are the same in a way that peace process involves intense political process as the dialogue itself.

To sum up on this point, for the national dialogue to be successful, there must be preparations, which are undertaken carefully and transparently by a preparatory committee that must be inclusive of all major parties to the conflict.

In respect to South Sudan in relation to this point, what the President ought to have done was to give independence and neutral party to the conflict responsibility to invite unconditionally all parties to the conflict including Dr. Riek Machar in South Sudan to negotiating table where they would agree on comprehensive and permanent cease-fire which will be followed by agreement on how national dialogue should be conducted.

Failure to do this confirms my last word on President Kiir’s Dialogue that it is neither a national dialogue nor a national monologue but it is a mockery of national dialogue.

The second reason I deem the present process in South Sudan not to be regarded as national dialogue is that it is not transparent since it lacks public participation.

The present so-called national dialogue is only composed all friends to the president who are not neutral and because of that it is in risks of or has lost legitimacy at the start. This is because there is a serious restriction on the public participation and also no way to keep the public informed about the process of national dialogue given the rampant insecurity in the country.

For the national dialogue to be successful, it must go beyond the delegates who are in the room. Hence, a national dialogue, should therefore, have mechanisms to include the broader population so that the public is able to understand the whole process and further able to contribute to the process of national dialogue.

Thus, the broad participation can only be achieved by linking local dialogue processes to the national dialogue, as well as through public consultations, regular outreach, and coverage in the media.

Failure to involve the greater public by the present proposed national dialogue makes not to be transparent which shows that it is very weak and consequently it will never achieve its purpose. This explains the fact that it is not a national dialogue as some people have perceived it.

Thirdly, a national dialogue must be led by a credible convener. The credible convener means the one who heads the dialogue. This is important as it helps to secure the participation of a wide variety of stakeholder groups since the process can be fair as it avoids the perceptions of biasness. Hence, a credible convener is very utmost important.

The convener may take the form of a single person, a group of people, an organization, or a coalition of organizations. Besides that, the convener must be a respected individual or group of persons or the convener should be respected by the majority of citizens and should not have any political aspirations or goals that would present an obvious conflict of interest.

The recent processes in Tunisia and Senegal for example, owe much of their success to the credibility of the conveners.

Relating this point to the present South Sudanese National dialogue, it is my contention that the convener appointed by President Kiir though may be neutral it is not credible as he is old and also his appointment is not sanctioned by all the parties to the conflict.

This may make him or two of them not credible conveners in the real sense and hence the said national dialogue is not national dialogue in the actual sense.

Fourthly, for the process to be termed as national dialogue, it must be topped by the agenda that addresses the root causes of conflict. This is because a national dialogue seeks to reach agreement on key issues facing a country.

It is for that reason, months or even years of pre-negotiation or consultation is needed purposely to allow the parties to identify and agree upon the fundamental issues that constitute the basis of the conflict.

The issues such as national identity, political rights, basic freedoms, institutional reforms or constitutional reform, equitable sharing of resources, election procedures, and the structure of government, which are central to the conflicts in South Sudan must be considered in the national dialogue negotiation or process.

Hence, a national dialogue’s agenda should provide for substantive conversation around the major grievances of all key interest groups in the country.

As seen in the above explanation the national dialogue must be started with the identification of the root causes of the conflict. This is important because once such root causes are identified and addressed, the permanent peace can be secured and the brighter future of citizens assured.

It is because of this fact the present proposed Kiir’s national dialogue is not a national dialogue in the real sense.

Fifthly, for a national dialogue to be called national dialogue and to achieve its purpose there must be clear mandate, structure, rules and procedures. This is because National dialogues often take place outside the existing institutions of government.

The reason for conducting it outside the government is that the sitting government and existing institutions are unable to resolve the major issues at hand, either because they are seen as neither legitimate nor credible, or because they are unwilling to challenge the status quo.
It is for the above reason a national dialogue is supposed to have its own set of procedures and rules for making decisions, which should be transparent and carefully geared towards the goal of achieving its purpose which is permanent peace.

There must be procedures that should include mechanisms to break deadlocks if an agreement cannot be reached. Furthermore, there must be a clear mandate that gives authority to a national dialogue committee. This must be established either through a peace agreement, law, presidential decree, or some other manner.

For example, the clear mandate of Tunisia’s national dialogue allowed delegates to make steady progress toward four goals: selecting a caretaker government, approving a new constitution, establishing an electoral management body, and setting a timetable for elections.

In relation to South Sudan, the National Dialogue Committee should have been given clear mandate to achieve four clear goals as stated in the above paragraph. This is important because there is a need to establish a new system which will involve dismantling the current system.

Failure give the national dialogue committee mandate to carry out the activities as explained here makes the present national dialogue not a national dialogue in actual sense.

Sixth, for a national dialogue to achieve its purpose there must be agreed mechanism for implementation of outcomes. Hence, national dialogue should clearly lay out the plan that will ensure that the resulting recommendations from the pre- and national dialogue negations are implemented.

As already pointed out above, the plan mechanism should involve the enactment of a new constitution, law, policy, or other programs and it must also take into considerations the issues of transitional justice, constitution making, and elections.

It must be noted that without a clear implementation plan, a national dialogue is at risks of consuming extensive time and resources without producing any tangible results.

This is because the political transition achieved through wrong procedure, which is produced by hastily organized national dialogue is a failure.

For that reason, for a national dialogue to be successful in South Sudan, it must have clear agreed mechanisms that will guide the transitional government in implementation of the outcomes of the national dialogue, which importantly include a political transition.

Lastly but not least, what makes the present national dialogue not a dialogue in the real sense is because the President does not have powers to institute the National Dialogue Committee.

The committee and the convener that should be selected to constitute national dialogue needed in South Sudan must be agreed by all the parties to the conflict, which is not the case in our purported national dialogue.

In conclusion, my last word on national dialogue of Kiir as based on all the reasons given above is that it is not a national dialogue in the real sense. Thus, for it to be national dialogue it must meet the principles explained above which in brief are inclusiveness; transparency, credible convener; it must be able to address the root causes of conflict in South Sudan; it must have a clear mandate, structure, rules, and procedures and agreed mechanism for implementation of the outcomes.

Without meeting these principles, I am afraid the constituted national dialogue has failed from the start. This is my last word!

NB//: the author is the human rights law and can be reached through: juoldaniel@yahoo.com

The National Dialogue Steering Committee & Membership Composition: Analysis

BY: Hüstin Läkü SR, South Sudan, MAY/27/2017, SSN;

Overview:

Several points should be made regarding “Republican Order for the Reconstitution of the National Dialogue Steering Committee” and Membership composition. The data collected on each individual member shows that Membership composition is not inclusive, but exclusive and dominated by one ethnic group mostly from two regions of South Sudan (formally Upper Nile and Bhar Al-Ghazal) currently, Warrap and northern Bhar Al-Ghazal, Jonglei, Unity and Upper Nile States. It is not a national dialogue; rather it’s a dia-state dialogue.

In addition, some members are from one family, for instance; Lt. Gen. Pieng Deng is a half brother of Dr. Francis Deng, as well as Ms. Lily Albino is a daughter of Rtd. Maj.Gen. Albino Akol Akol. Data collected when analyzed on key positions, ethnicity, political parties, gender and professional association affiliations etc. leads to the conclusion that it’s not a national dialogue, but a fraud and a scam to manipulate the current situation to benefit Jieng council of elders (JCE), buying time, mislead international community as well as insulting to the intelligence of South Sudanese citizens and friends of South Sudan.

The initial observations show the following:

Which one comes first, Peace or dialogue?

As a matter of principle, achieving peace should be the priority and followed by dialogue. Therefore, dialogue cannot replace absent of peace and it cannot resolve political and humanitarian crisis in the country in the way it’s conceived and being implemented.

Furthermore, this is not the right time for dialogue in the middle of ongoing war in the country and massacre of thousands of civilians, forcing hundreds of thousands into refuge in the neighboring countries. A genuine dialogue should be after the 2015 peace implementation and when All South Sudanese returnees and refugees have returned home in their constituencies.

For instance, South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission was established and functioned after political settlements brought the nation together after long period of healing processes. To do the opposite is setting the country into wrong direction, shaky ground and it might lead to disintegration of South Sudan to smaller States as it happened in the Balkans.

Key Positions

Co-Chair and Rapporteur and Deputy Rapporteur positions are controlled by JCE hardliners. These members are the architects of the “born to rule” Dinka slogan in late 1970’s and early 1980s. The slogan born to rule is now born to destroy South Sudan.

As is commonly said, the previous experiences determine the future experiences and outcomes; the hardliners will control direction of discussions as well as pre-determine the resolutions of South Sudan National Dialogue (SSND) which will not be representative of views and opinions of opposing parties and other ethnicities.

For example, in 1989, President Omer Hassan Al-Bashir initiated national dialogue and invited SPLM/A to participated, and Dr. Garang declined on the ground that, it was not inclusive and controlled by the northerners and hardliners Members of NIF and SSND is no different than the former Sudan national dialogue and even worst.

Ethnicity

South Sudan has 66 ethnic groups and only 18 ethnic groups were represented in very small number against 45 members from one ethnicity group. 48 ethnic groups who suffered the most human right violations are excluded from participations. Equatoria has 32 ethnic groups and 13 ethnic groups were appointed.

Political Parties

South Sudan has 36 political parties and only 2 are included and these two are part of Juba regime. E.g. Taban Deng IO and Joseph Ukel groups. In addition, most members are SPLM and SPLM/IO cadres. The key positions of decision making are controlled by hardliners of Jieng Council of elders (JCE) and excluded women.

Gender

Gender representation is not balanced and contrary to the concept of 25% quotas for women. The current list shows that women represents only 15.6%, and 8 out of 15 women are mostly citizens of Warrap, northern Bahr Al-Ghazal, Jongeli, and Unity States and sadly enough there is no single woman appointed in key position-this is a complete marginalization of South Sudanese women and defeats 25% quotas system.

Religious leaders

Clergymen representation is not balanced and the current list shows that there is no representation from government critics such as Catholic Church vocal clergymen Bishop Laku, all were excluded as well as important members of opposition groups such IO, PDM, NMC, NDC and many others. The list shows many Bishops and Pastors who were silent about their colleague Pastor Lasu and many other pastors who were killed by national security the day after national day of prayers and prior. This shows that these Bishops and Pastors are supporters of government and its corrupting influence on society, with many among them being co-opted by the government.

Civil Society, Youth, and People with disabilities

Civil Society, Youth and people with disabilities groups are completely disregarded. The behavior of South Sudan government suggests that youth and people with disabilities have no value in South Sudan’s development, decision-making as well as have no say in future of nation building.

For the benefit of readers and concerned citizens of South Sudan and friends of South Sudan, it is important to shed light on some key members of the committee, and provide analysis on overall selected members and draw conclusion with some recommendations to move the country forward.

First

Abel Alier is Dinka from Bor and was a Former Vice President of Sudan (1970-1982), he served as president of the High Executive Council of Southern Sudan in Juba, after Lt. Gen. Joseph Lago gave him green light to do so. Alier was the first Southern Sudanese to introduce mono ethnic politics and Dinka hegemony in South Sudan which lead to Kokora in 1983. His time was known by tribalism, employment and appointments of one ethnic group based on tribal lines and favoritism.

Alier never participated in the first phase of civil war (1956-1972) fought mainly by Equatorians as well as the second civil war from 1983-2005. Alier has always acted on the advice of Khartoum regimes and advanced the interests of Arab-north in the South. Alier is one of the architects of “born to rule” slogan in late 1970s and early1980s.

Bona Malwal is a Dinka from Warrap and Warrap is Kiir’s home State. Malwal is a member of the secretive Jieng Council of Elders tribal advisory council to President Kiir. Malwal was Minister in Alier’s Cabinet in the Regional Government of Southern Sudan. Malwal is key member of the “born to rule” Dinka slogan along with Alier, Justin Yack and Joshua De Wal.

Malwal was an opponent of the late Dr John Garang De Mabior and the anti- separation of South Sudan. Malwal was known for his famous hate speech which he delivered on Saturday, March 21st, 2015 in Kansas City, Kansas, U.S.A. In the meeting, Mr. Bona Malwal said “South Sudan existed thanks to the Dinka and therefore belongs to the Dinka people, and the Dinka have earned it and are where they are now above all others in South Sudan.” Please, refer to below link for full text.

South Sudan a country for Dinka only, Bona Malwal tells Dinka in USA

Dr. Francis Deng, is Dinka Ngok of Abyei. Abyei is still disputed area by both Juba and Khartoum and its fate is still unknown. Deng is known for his unionist position and opposes South Sudan secession and defended his views in many public forums in Middle East. He expresses his views in letter exchange with former University of Juba Professor currently in Oman as well as with former retired South Sudanese Professor at University of Toronto in Canada. 25% of Abyei citizens hold key positions in South Sudan government and some holders of Sudanese passports and working for Khartoum regime and some receiving salaries from both Juba and Khartoum.

Lt. Gen. Pieng Deng is Dinka Ngok of Abyei, and a half brother of Dr. Francis Deng. Gen. Pieng was former Chief of Police. South Sudan Police Services administrative corruption happened under his authority.

Second

Analysis

The objective of a dialogue is not to analyze things, or to win an argument, or to exchange opinions or to pre-determine the outcome of dialogue or pre-written dialogue resolutions. Rather, it is to suspend your opinions and to look at the opinions of other parties into dispute, to listen to everybody’s opinions, to suspend them, and to see what all that means in resolving political crisis, peace without justice, land grabbing, marginalization and exclusion from administration of the country, mono ethnic politics and centralization of political, economic, administrative and military powers in the hands of few or two ethnicities.

SSND in its current status will not achieve everlasting peace, but rather it will create more division, suffering, killings, and political instability in the region. The call for dialogue is short on details of how the country would be secured for the oppositions to attend a national dialogue convened by Kiir, when he was the one who led South Sudan to the present Quagmire”.

How would a tribally dominated Government be impartial in addressing the problems it created of bad governance, exclusion of majority of non-Dinka people in the national political process, and the country’s collapsed economy and dysfunctional, illegitimate political institutions?

What South Sudan requires is political settlement through peace talks that includes all parties into the conflicts, but not mono ethnic dialogue or dia-state dialogue. Why mono ethnic dialogue? because it excluded 48 ethnic groups in the refugee camps in the neighboring countries who would love to participate.

The solution to South Sudan man-made political and humanitarian crisis is not mon dialogue, but reforms of government institutions and deliver justice to the victims of land grabbing; rapes; marginalization and exclusion; favoritism; tribalism; lack of promotion of non Dinka public servants; limit President Powers; division of powers to three levels of government; human rights crimes and held criminals and public servant’s thefts who stole 4.5 billion dollars from government coffer accountable.

The solution to South Sudan bad governance is for the current and future government should reflect 66 ethnic groups at all government levels specially security, police, customs, army and public services as well as division of powers to all levels of governments.

The solution to South Sudan political crisis is when South Sudanese is treated equally not based on his or her ethnic groups and employed based on job merits, not of favoritism.

The solution to South Sudan political crisis is encouraging opposition groups whether it armed groups or not they should participate in any national issues. Government’s argument of preventing them is has no logic to it. During the CPA talks, If Khartoum regime would put forward similar argument of “preventing armed groups from peace talks” South Sudanese would be fighting the north today.

What should be done?

If Juba regime still maintains its position of resolving political crisis through dialogue, than the SSND should be under the auspices of an independent international organization such as Initiative of Change Swiss (IofC). IofC has credibility, expertise, experiences, and skills to select members from all parties in the conflict, conduct fair and impartial process in neutral location and submit final report with recommendations.
http://ca.iofc.org/iofc-international

African Union should replace IGAD lead in negotiation with both government and opposition groups, because most IGAD Members have vested interests in South Sudan and they are not impartial.

African union should encourage and support opposition groups to unite their objectives, and speak in one voice.
Kiir’s government should release political and non-political detainees, because it is key towards political settlement. The current list of detainees is exclusively non-Dinka which raises alarm. Please, see attached detainees list for full picture of injustice and discrimination.

South Sudanese politicians and senior public servants are well known for their high level of corruption. They have sticky fingers that have been implicated in the disappearance of public funds, and development money which more often than not ended up in their private accounts in banks overseas. To combat, financial corruption in South Sudan, it is very important that Western governments should pass law that will prohibits transfer of money from South Sudan to western banks without proper transparency; also the law must force, and persecute the international financial institutions (IFI) and other banks or bankers who fail to disclose any private accounts from South Sudan, and specially if the account is related to statesmen. Failure of the Western governments to act means that the West is encouraging, and abetting the endemic corruption in Africa.

AU,UN,EU and Western governments should find legal mechanism to recover the stolen $4.5 billion from South Sudan and repatriate the fund to pay public servant salaries, development programs and project such as health care, schools and others

Finally, President Kiir’s should put the interest of the nation first, before his personal and tribal interests. Kiir should give peace a chance by consideration stepping down to provide positive environment for political settlement and move South Sudan out of political, economic, humanitarian crisis. The longer Kiir stays in power the worst people suffer in refugee and IDP camps as well as the country suffers economically.

Hüstin Läkü,SR
Federalism, Decentralization, Conflict Resolution and International Development Consultant

Pres. Kiir’s One-sided National Dialogue is a Sham: Bakasoro’s SSNMC Press Release

South Sudan National Movement for Change (SSNMC) would like to voice our opinion on Salva Kiir’s so-called national dialogue.

On Tuesday, May 22, 2017 President Kiir launched his so-called national dialogue and inaugurated its steering committee, whose membership comprises mainly of and/or dominated (about 80 percent) by members of the Jieng Council of Elders (JCE) with few members from other ethnic communities mainly supporters of Kiir’s government.

While Kiir claims to launch national dialogue, his militias are busy carrying out massive genocide across South Sudan. Most recently the “mathiang anyor” and “dut ku beny” militia killed innocent civilians in Yei, Ri-Rangu (Yambio), and Wau.

The country is not ready for national dialogue until all people put their guns down. Therefore, if Kiir wants the
national dialogue to be meaningful and effective, he should go back to the drawing board and produce an agreement that takes into consideration the interests of the entire country.

Besides Kiir cannot appoint himself the patron, as well as appointing members of his own tribe and supporters to the steering committee, while he himself manufactured the ongoing crises.

Thus, the national dialogue will never succeed if Kiir continues to select and exclude people according to his wishes.

We also appeal to the entire people of South Sudan not to accept the dirty politics of divide and rule perpetrated by the Kiir regime and his unconstitutional JCE in Juba.

SSNMC believes that for the national dialogue to be effective, it must take place in an atmosphere of freedom and liberty, whereby citizens are free to talk their mind without fear of apprehension or persecution or exclusion.

SSNMC also believes that only the JCE and their supporters will attend and participate in this national dialogue forum since it is conducted under government control, in this respect the initiative is only to satisfy the
interest of Salva Kiir, JCE and their supporters.

It is our strong conviction that, Salva Kiir’s unilateral ceasefire is only a spin to show to the entire globe that he is serious about peace, this is not the first time that such ceasefire has been declared and abrogated and there is no reason why this one should be taken seriously instead Kiir’s real intention is to continue with his genocidal agenda under the pretext of self-defense.

Therefore, it is SSNMC belief that a selective and one-sided national dialogue, which excludes the opposition groups and dominated only by one ethnic group, will never yield any peace dividend for the people of South Sudan.

If President Kiir is serious about peace in South Sudan, let him renew the peace process in good faith and be inclusive besides, such national dialogue should begin with the release of all political detainees as gesture
of good will; be conducted after an inclusive and comprehensive peace agreement is reached to ensure that all South Sudanese people regardless of their positions are involved including the millions of refugees, displaced persons and South Sudanese in diaspora.

SOUTH SUDAN NATIONAL MOVEMENT FOR CHANGE
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
May 24, 2017
Contact: Daniel Zingifuaboro
Phone: +61 474 047 016
Email: Daniel.isbon@gmail.com

Response to Religious Leaders’ call for inclusive National Dialogue to end S. Sudan war: “You’re a brood of vipers”

BY: Rev Daniel Amum Odwel, South Sudan, MAY/23/2017, SSN;

First and foremost, the call for genuine inclusive dialogue is welcome by all, if it is initiated by a neutral patron who is not part of ongoing atrocities in South Sudan. Honestly, the religious leaders seem to support ‘national dialogue’ of Kiir and his inner circle groups blindly.

The public these days is too disappointed with contrary words uttered by the Bishop Isaac Dhieu who said “he denounced the voices that advocate war and glorify violence in the name of reforms.”

Those words were preached by the government against opposition, so when people heard those words in the month of Bishop Isaac, immediately they concluded that Bishop Isaac and his colleagues are agents of government in clerical robes.

Critically, Bishop Isaac and his colleagues were not authentic and genuine in their remarks. It is much easier to notice that they were supporting one side of the coin…that is the government.

Did they want to convince the public that violence is only caused by reform forces? In case the answer is yes, they must illustrate to the public that the massacre that took place in Wau town was committed by those for reforms?

Were the atrocities in the whole Equatoria regions committed by them? The exodus that’s taking place in Upper Nile at the moment, was it caused by reforms as you proclaim in your remarks?

Bishop Isaac and his colleagues, now you look odd in sight of the nation, for they see you as hardline supporters of Salva Kiir.

The Church must stand on its ground without wavering under worldly pressure, look at how John the Baptist was able to challenge the criminal leaders of his times by telling them that they are ‘a brood of vipers’ (Luke.3:7).

The true Church leaders should uphold the right things, and should never be conforming to the world but should be the transformers of the world into harmony and tranquility, peace and justice. Indeed, any church leaders who support a criminal entity, whether the government or opposition, are also criminals.

People thought that your position should have been to advise Salva Kiir, that he shouldn’t be the patron of the National Dialogue and also to plead with him that this dialogue can’t take place at this moment because the true owners of the dialogue, the communities in South, are on the run for their safety.

Look, Salva Kiir calls it inclusive but contrarily, he stresses that he doesn’t want Dr. Riak Machar to take part in this so-called national dialogue. To me it is not a national dialogue but party dialogue that has nothing to do with national issues.

Here, let me point out another loose, vague and compromised statement, that the church leaders, who support the government cited: “The country’s political leaders (should) use the national dialogue as the opportunity to resolve the differences and call on religious leaders to persevere in their role as educators, by preaching love and brotherhood within families, communities and places of worship”.

Who are the religious leaders you are indicating here? Your provocative statement betrayed the church and implied that you are government agents and appointed propaganda, and not God’s appointed leaders.

Ironically, any agent of the government or IO in clerical robes can’t play the role of educators or proclaim the gospel of love in the communities because they will only uphold the message of their party.

When they stand before the congregation, people will recall tragedies committed by their party on the communities, and people instantly become skeptical and suspicious.

Indeed, could such agent of government or IO in clerical rob reconcile such communities? I real doubt it; will the agents of the government be ready to admit offences and holocaust committed by their party against targeted communities?

The fact is, will church leaders who are supporters of the government, have courage enough to tell the members of their party to leave grabbing of land, the invaders to leave for their original land peacefully, and the raiders to give back livestock to true owners and the kidnappers of kids to give children back to the real parents?

Moreover, will the church leaders who support the government be able to encourage their party to come up openly to apologize nationwide and ask for forgiveness?

In case the church leaders, who are part of the system, failed to ensure what are mentioned above, then they shouldn’t speak about national dialogue or reconciliation. For it is hard for targeted communities in South Sudan to believe what had been initiated by killers.

In relate to extermination that was committed by warring parties in Bor, Bentiu and Malakal, Waw and Equatorial regions, what was the position of so-called Church leaders, the agents of doom in that regard?

Are the agents of the government in clerical robes ready to come out publicly to admit their deadly mistakes and accept their responsibilities? If not, it will be difficult to accomplish national dialogue.

The reconciliation at this moment is quite difficult to be attained because atrocities are fresh, vivid and obnoxious in the minds of people, for they are still mourning for loved or missing ones in the family.

In South Sudan, it is too hard to easily achieve the reconciliation in traditional societies where the idea of forgiveness is obscure and revenge is the only thing they know.

We know the ministry of reconciliation is God’s ministry that He entrusted to His appointed ministers, in order to maintain peace, harmony and tranquility among his creatures. For sure it can’t be accomplished by agents of government within the church.

Christ has given himself to die on the Cross as ransom to reconcile the world to God the Father. The question that poses itself is, will Kiir and Riak be ready to step down from their positions as ransom for reconciliation?

Reconciliation is God’s motto, this is why Christ reconciled us to God and gave the ministry of reconciliation to God’s agent that is the church, but not to church leaders who support criminal institutions that killed their own people.

Indeed, the church leaders, who are agents of government or IO couldn’t be peacemakers, peace builders or reconciliators because they are part of evil-doers.

Tell me, can a pastor that supports warring parties preach about reconciliation in communities murdered by their party members and be welcomed? The answer is big no.

Jesus Christ rendered his life for the sake of humanity, but tribal church leaders in South Sudan are part of the problem rather than being part of the solution. In most cases they politicized everything to pass as tribal agendas.

To champion the reconciliation in South Sudan, the church leaders should stop being partial in their approaches to public issues.

I strongly oppose that the government of Salva Kiir in the South Sudan can’t and will not champion national dialogue or reconciliation because he is a part of holocaust. Indeed, the question of national dialogue or reconciliation must be suspended because the government and its agents within the church are not qualified to shoulder that task.

Imagine there is good slogan used in South Sudan…”One nation and one people”, but the speeches and languages uttered by those who initiated the slogan are deadly poison and will not make South Sudan to be one nation and one people.

In case the government of Salva Kiir and its agents within the church are serious to achieve the national dialogue and reconciliation, than the following giant diseases must be dealt with first:
1- Laws must be put in place to avoid segregation, nepotism, favoritism, superiority and inferiority complexes among one people;
2- People must avoid undermining the rights of minority communities and discrimination of others at the expense of not being members of a particular party, and;
3- Provision of opportunity to every individual on equal basis using educational qualifications and skill experiences.

The war in South Sudan is continuously claiming many innocent lives because the church leaders lost the right path and started to worship the government and IO and forgetting why they were called.

Let me refer you to what God said to Jeremiah: “Cursed is the one who trusts in man, who depends on flesh for his strength and whose heart turns away from the Lord. Blessed is the man who trusts in the Lord, whose confidence is in him.” (Jer.17:5, 7). END

History rewards those who destroy but not those who build the nation

BY: Santino Aniek, UpState New York, USA, MAY/22/2017, SSN;

President Kiir has tired down a relationship between the man who helped him during the 2013 Crisis when madness consumed Mr. Mayardit’s humanness by dissolving the entire government and dismissing some of the seniors members of the SPLM Party. There is, obviously, much we do not know about what has just happened between President Kiir and General Paul Malong Awan, why it happened. Just as obvious, there is much more, so much more that we need to know the firing of General Paul.

In addition, we need to damn the dishonesty and expose the truth now to avoid another conflict because South Sudanese people are tried of wars. In fact, I really do not get it, I mean, I expect it because every thing is possible in South Sudan, but I do not get it.

As of today, no one understands the psychology of Juba, because it seems like there are many people in that country who are not only uninterested in peace and security, but will actually get angry with you for displaying any interest in peace and security of our citizens.

And so this happens on both sides, government as well as opposition, by the way. However, there is a flood coming that will devastate the future of our country in ways no one can predict.

Except that the speed with which this has all happened, just over couple of days into President Kiir’s dumpster firing of General Paul, means it was all very predictable because all things in South Sudan are possible. And no one who played a role in controlling this President should be allowed to forget it.

Truly, I’m sorry; this is madness because General Paul helped President Kiir in staying in power, but ended up being fired, why.

The dismissal of General Paul is a “moral evil” because if this tragedy is not handled responsibly, it will cause devastation of South Sudan.

Nonetheless, General Paul never rebelled against the movement or against the government and he was opposed to all rebellions since the start of the movement till today. Which is more than can be said for the numerous people in President Kiir’s government who have rebelled not once, not twice, but many times and ended up in the most important positions in the government.

Nevertheless, during the formation of President Kiir’s government, General Paul did not run to Juba to pursue a position, but he stayed in Aweil because, as a humble man, he could not bring himself down against his colleagues who’re always pursuing government position.

Now tell me what would you do differently if you were General Paul Malong? Would you take up arms against the government you have defended for so many years?

If you are President Kiir, is that such a simple choice to be making to fire a guy that has been defending you all these years?

Can you really not appreciate the complexity of the situation that General Paul is facing now in Juba? Folks, I need help here because I’m totally lost since the day I heard the news till now.

In fact, General Paul was and is still widely respected by both sides, by the SPLA, by the SPLM, and by the majority of South Sudanese people.

For example, reading the reaction on social media has made all of us understand just how highly regarded General Paul is by the SPLA and by the people South Sudan he defended all these years.

Therefore, at the time his appointment as general chief of staff, General Paul is one of the greatest Generals this country ever produced, and he is a man of honor and dignity.

More importantly, South Sudanese people recognize that, SPLA recognize that, SPLM recognized that, and President Kiir recognizes that, but today, President Kiir cast General Malong aside as a bad General, a traitor, and from the reaction we have received on social media, he has made the firing of General Malong as disgraceful.

Finally, we can talk about the political cause of the firing of General Paul, but it cannot be disputed that the man who actually fought this senseless war did so to protect the country as well as to protect President Kiir.

We may not know the whole detail and the motivation of the firing, but sometimes a bit of historical perspective is necessary. We now know, the same historical perspective that afforded people to stand behind President Kiir.

Such a moment when Juba seems to be falling apart, who did not remember that moment, but maybe, I should say maybe there is a partial credit to General Paul by creating his own name and by helping President Kiir during all these years.

Yet, we put these evils aside General Paul took care of it, but to just fire him is troubling. Can we not then put our differences aside and allow a great man like General Paul to be remembered and honored, as a compatriot and honor him?

Ultimately, the supporters of President Kiir may mark this firing of General Paul as one of the truly dark days in South Sudan, a day that may soon take an even more ominous turn.

Sadly enough, President Kiir’s sudden firing of General Malong is a matter that should deeply concern every South Sudanese, regardless of party, tribe or ideological leanings.

Most importantly, the firing of a General or politician in South Sudan is always a very serious matter in normal times. But these times are not normal because the country has been engaging in one of the most important and dangerous conflict that the country ever had.

In fact, to politicize this thing is the last thing South Sudanese people need as we struggle through the maze of problems, concealment and ever-deepening mysteries all these years.

The last time the President fired political heavy-weights, Aleu Alieny Aleu and Telar Ring, was during the widespread criminal conspiracy. And during the firing of these two, we all know how that turned out.

In real sense, this potential tragedy of firing General Paul is much graver if President Kiir and his General resolved their differences very quickly.

We are talking about the very security of President Kiir and the sanctity of our country.

Now, it is true that history does not reward good people like General Paul, but it rewards those killers of our people.

Santino Aniek is a concerned South Sudanese in Upstate New York, U.S.A. He can be reached at santino.aniek5@gmail.com and find me on Facebook, on Skype and on twitter @saniek.

South Sudan makes us all look bad: Africa must advice or oust Kiir from power now

By Charles Onyango-Obbo, THE EASTAFRICAN, MAY/17/2017, SSN;

IN SUMMARY:
Africa needs to read the riot act to Kiir to piece the country back together, or marshal an invasion force and oust him if he won’t. South Sudan makes us all look bad.

The sacking of an army chief anywhere in the world, particularly Africa, is usually big news.

But the panicked reaction to the news that South Sudan’s President Salva Kiir fired army head General Paul Malong on Tuesday was extraordinary.

Many feared that the situation could get worse in the world’s newest nation, which has been ravaged by war since Kiir fell out with his deputy Riek Machar, resulting in savage fighting that made many ashamed of knowing the South Sudanese.

They had reason to be afraid. Malong was no longer an ordinary army chief. A polygamist with 40 wives and enough children to fill two villages, he was seen as the puppet master in South Sudan, and Kiir the puppet. He was the hardline Nuer iron fist behind the throne.

On Wednesday, Kiir trotted out the SPLA spokesman to say that Malong had withdrawn with his security guards to outside of the capital, Juba, but was not planning a rebellion.

Maybe he won’t, because the new army chief James Ajongo is alleged to been picked by Malong. He is a kind of Malong lite.

Hopefully, Kiir will now strike a more moderate posture, because he may still have a country, but will soon run out people.

More than 1.8 million South Sudanese have fled the country as refugees, according to the latest UN figures. Most have ended up in Uganda, Kenya, Ethiopia, and Sudan.

Uganda hosts most of the refugees, nearly 800,000. In Kampala on Tuesday, Prime Minister Ruhakana Rugunda said the country would next month seek $2 billion at a UN refugee summit in Kampala to help fund relief operations for the South Sudanese refugees.

With a population of 12.4 million, South Sudan has made nearly 15 per cent of its population refugees in fewer than four years.

In addition, more than 3.5 million people have been internally displaced since the fighting erupted in mid-December 2013.

If the war doesn’t end, and intensifies, in another three or so years more than 25 per cent of South Sudanese could be refugees. And if the number of IDPs were also to double over the same period, accounting for those who will have been slaughtered in war, fallen to disease, or starved to death in the famine, virtually the whole population of South Sudan would be living outside their homes and off their land.

For a country like Uganda, the prospect of say two million South Sudanese pouring into the country by 2020 is scary, its much-praised refugee policy notwithstanding.
The only place where the South Sudanese are living properly at home could be the street on which Kiir lives in Juba.

That is overdramatised, yes, but it is to make the point that Africa must finally do something bold to stop the madness in South Sudan.

Among other things, it should ensure that Malong leaves South Sudan, either by force, or by being paid off Yahya Jammeh-style. He has a lot of prime real estate in Nairobi and Kampala, and a small country of a family to feed, so he may be susceptible to generous inducements.

And Africa needs to read the riot act to Kiir to piece the country back together, or marshal an invasion force and oust him if he won’t. South Sudan makes us all look bad.

Charles Onyango-Obbo is publisher of data visualiser Africapaedia and Rogue Chiefs. Twitter@cobbo3

Our land, Oil, 16 May, Citizenship & Nationality – taken away by Chinese Masters: Is it New Colonization or Slavery in South Sudan?

By: Daniel Juol Nhomngek, Kampala, Uganda, MAY/16/2017, SSN;

Summary:
***South Sudan has oil but does not know the terms of the contract with the Chinese Contractors. From this oil contract, South Sudan’s government made $316 million from oil sales in about seven months in 2016, the UN says and in March 2017, South Sudan was declared to be under threat of famine.
***At least half of the country’s budget is being spent on arms even though a famine has been declared.
***South Sudanese workers who are the owners of the oil are working in worse conditions than slaves: they are paid peanuts, work under worse conditions. Government officials are bribed to award Chinese Masters contracts whose terms they do not know.
***The China National Petroleum Company (CNPC), the biggest investor in South Sudan’s oilfields is the master and the controller of oil resources while South Sudanese are slaves on their land.
***South Sudan’s oil is proving to be one of the trickiest puzzles: it has 7 billion barrels in proven reserves, small compared with African oil giants such as Nigeria but enough, if it was all extracted, to meet the oil needs of the United States for a year.

How South Sudan uses its oil, which accounts for almost all of the country’s income is not clear. But war and corruption rules the oil drilling.

We all fought the war. The main reason we fought the war was to control our resources so that we use them for the development of ourselves and our country. This was the hope every South Sudanese had before independence of South Sudan. This in fact is a well founded hope as South Sudan in actual sense is a large country endowed with a lot of resources.

According to African Economic Outlook, Special Thematic Edition of 2013, South Sudan is a large (619 745 square kilometers) country that is very rich in natural resources, many of which remain to be discovered. It also pointed out that the available natural resources are water, hydro-power, fertile agricultural land (about 90% of which is arable land), gold, diamonds, petroleum (with proven reserves of 7 million barrels), hardwoods, limestone, iron ore, copper, chromium ore, zinc, tungsten, mica and silver.

Furthermore, South Sudan has a lot of wildlife of which protected area of Bandingilo National Park that hosts the second-largest wildlife migration in the world is one of them. Besides, South Sudan is rich in agricultural land, which includes the largest populations of pastoralists in the world.

In spite of the many resources as listed in the above paragraph, South Sudan remains one of the poorest countries in the world because it has not utilized other resources except the oil or petroleum. Hence, this article discusses the management of oil contracts in South Sudan; negative impact such mismanagement has on South Sudanese citizens, corruption embedded in and surrounding oil production and business, mysteries about the oil contract, negative impact the oil production has on citizens.

Above all, disenfranchisement of citizens which made them to become slaves in their own land while Chinese citizens exploiting and killing them by supplying guns to both rebels and the government, which end up being used indiscriminately against innocent citizens. Hence, my discussion will be as explained in this paragraph.

What needs to be noted at the onset of this article is our oil contract is controlled by Chinese and Khartoum. This is because the oil contact which establishes the relationship between South Sudan and China was the one signed between Khartoum and China before independence of South Sudan.

However, since independence, South Sudan has not reviewed the said contract and does not have any intention to review it. The reason for this reluctance is not known.

Nevertheless, it appears that the failure of the Government to demand the contract from China and Khartoum is due to two reasons as explained below:—

First, there is lack of seriousness and political will on the side of the government or if not there must be a dominant group of people within the government who are benefiting from the oil and because of that their desire is to leave things as they are. This is the first possible reason.

Second, the failure of the Government of South Sudan to review the oil contract may be due to the fact that China threatens South Sudan if it insists on reviewing the said oil contract. Otherwise, if that is not the case, then under ordinary circumstances, any Sovereign Country would not allow herself to go into a contract that it has not understood.

In fact, the first action the Government of South Sudan would have taken immediately after independence was to recall all contracts signed by Khartoum in regard to South Sudan oil and other resources in order to review them.

However, that was not done by Juba and it is not clear why Juba decided to continue with the contract signed by Khartoum with China though its terms are not up to date disclosed to the government of South Sudan.

In addition, failure to adhere to the principles of transparency and accountability in oil management in South Sudan has left corruption at oil sector flourishing uncontrollably.

To prove this fact one has to go to Juba city and other towns in South Sudan to see what is going there. For instance, if one goes there with the purpose of proving this point, the first thing he or she notices on the streets of Juba, the capital of South Sudan and other towns is a lot of white Toyota Land Cruisers, V8, Hammers and other expensive cars.

All these cars except for the UN and foreign missions, are bought with oil money and since oil constitutes 98% of country’s income, no much money is left to develop and provide services to the people.

Thus, all services are not available because of corruption which has very much affected oil sector, which is the only source of money in the country. Even this sector generates more than enough money but all is stolen.

What even worries me or complicates or worsens the matters is the lack of knowledge about the debts South Sudan owes to other countries and the World Bank. This is because debt management is poor since there is no transparency and accountability in borrowing and terms of repayment. In other words, debts owed to other countries by South Sudan are not known.

However, the recent International Monetary Fund report for 2016 on the Republic of South Sudan staff under article iv consultation concerning the debt sustainability analysis, economic crisis and continued political instability, it has been found out:
“That the total external debt remained at about US$1 billion through 2016; that by June 2016, debt to the World Bank amounted to US$34 million on IDA terms, while US$100 million had been borrowed from China Exim Bank to reconstruct Juba international airport. That the balance of outstanding oil advances from international oil companies and traders is estimated at US$219 million. Finally, the Bank of South Sudan (BSS) has an outstanding liability to the Qatar National Bank amounting to about US$610 million, originating from short-term credit facilities (guaranteed by the Government of South Sudan) that fell into arrears in 2015”.

In addition, on April 16, 2015 the Eye Radio reported Dr. Lam Akol to have said that the government had accumulated more than ten billion US dollars in foreign debt, which he said is not a secret, although he did not disclose the source of the information (visit: www.eyeradio.org/south-sudan-accumulates-10m-debt-3-years)

It should be noted that since 2008, China and South Sudan have concluded agreements worth about 10 billion USD and the latter through official channels has expressed willingness to have Beijing’s support for projects worth 8 billion USD (visit: africanarguments.org › Home › Politics).

All the money mentioned above are not granted for free but they are debts that must be repaid by the Government of South Sudan with interests. What is even bad is that there is nothing to be shown as a project on which the above money was spent on.

This is because the lenders do not monitor how the money borrowed from them is spent by the government. Hence, all money borrowed end in individuals’ pockets.

It should be observed that it is oil under the ground which is being sold by the present government and by the time it has gone, South Sudan would be left without oil but unpaid debts that will make us slaves to creditors, the ownership of our resources will be taken away by Chinese Masters and others business organizations.

Oil companies have corrupted the system in South Sudan by circumventing rules of procurement through bribes. This enables them to find their way straight to top officials with plans, hence bypassing the law or other arrangements and are awarded contract though they have not qualified under the strict procurement rules. Lack of accountability and transparency hides this serious corruption.

To make the matters worse, some of the South Sudanese technocrats that had returned from Sudan or other countries with knowledge to work in South Sudan’s oil industry have conspired with the Chinese Oil contractors; hence, declining to publish figures like oil output and revenue, which they consider too important to reveal.

We cannot blame China much but our government of South Sudan since it is the one duty-bound to fight for the interest of citizens of South Sudan.

Sadly enough, our government is acting like an imperialist government which only works for private interests. Currently, our government has allowed control over oil to be exercised by Sudan and China, which still have absolute control over oil resources in the country.

As a result, Chinese treat citizens of South Sudan working at oil sector like slaves: they are paid less than wages or salaries given to the Chinese workers or employees though South Sudanese workers or employees may be more qualified than their Chinese counterparts.

In order to remain in control of the oil, China is fueling the war by supplying guns to both rebels and the government, though the supplies to the government is more than to the rebels as the Government is presumed to be in control of the oil.

In order to take control over our oil, the Chinese must be forced to be more transparent.

The country’s rulers are struggling to crush several rebellions using arms from China purposely supplied to keep the war going so that they benefit out of the chaotic domestic politics as the government and oppositions are struggling for power, money, politics and resources and for the government to maintain their dominance over the country resources.

NB// the author is human rights lawyer and can be reached through: juoldaniel@yahoo.com

SPLA changes to SSDF: Is Malong a baptismal sacrifice?

By: Samuel Atabi, South Sudanese, MAY/16/2017, SSN;

The sacked Chief of Staff, Paul Malong, of the re-named tribal SPLA is a character from the ‘Lord of the Flies’, a 1954 novel published by the Nobel prize-wining English author William Golding. The book tells a story of a group of young British boys’ disastrous attempt to govern themselves on a remote and isolated island somewhere in the Pacific Ocean.

The novel plots a story of power struggle between two characters, Jack and Ralph, as to who will be the leader on their new territory.

Jack, a power-hungry maniac plots to kill Ralph, a level-headed boy whose main concern is the well-being of every boy on the island.

Jack frightens the young ones with a false story of a presence of a beast on the island; this is a ruse to justify galloping ambition to be a leader in order to save the group.

In contrast, Ralph says there is no such a beast. Jack, with the help of a hatchet boy, Roger, forcibly grabs symbols of power from Ralph: these are a conch, for a democratic right to speak in a gathering and eye glasses, which is the only means of starting a fire in the wilderness of the island.

Jacks set up a shrine of a false god, actually a severed head of a wild pig mounted on a stick with swarming flies. The name of the god is the ‘Lord of the Flies’.

The struggle becomes deadly where two boys are killed, one by Roger using a boulder thrown from an elevated position, while the other is crushed by worshippers of the new god. Roger helps Jack to hunt down Ralph who has run away and hid in another part of the island.

The hunting party, armed with sticks sharpened at both ends, flashes Ralph out of his hideout by setting fire to the forest. It then pursues him for a final kill. Ralph strips and falls down prostrate, on the ground.

And at exactly that moment, an adult in the form of a naval officer appears on the scene. The officer has been alerted while on a nearby ship by the raging fire that is almost burning down the whole of the island. He helps stop the madness and Ralph is thus rescued.

Can one see a resemblance of this dangerous childhood prank to the recent happenings in South Sudan?

If one has knowledge of where the ruling clique of the burning South Sudan came from, then equating these leaders to the child-characters in the ‘Lords of the Flies’ cannot be considered as far-fetched.

The infantile manner in which they refuse to take responsibility for their genocidal action can be largely blamed on the deceased leader of the SPLA, Dr John Garang. He led the now defunct SPLA with an iron fist. It was as if he was the only adult in the liberation army.

He controlled everything, from store-keeping to training and promotion of the rank and file. He negotiated the 2005 Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) by himself, because he could not trust any of his lieutenants to lead a delegation to the peace talks. The Sudan delegation was led by the deputy to Omer Beshir.

Garang sneered at formal education, (despite his PhD) and he lulled the barely educated soldiers that un-education was not necessarily a bad thing.

In any case, he predicted, those who were educating themselves away from the front lines would eventually be clerks to his victorious liberating, if functionally illiterate, soldiers.

The title ‘Dr’ was only reserved for him while those with similar qualifications and titles were forbidden from appending them to their names. He brooked no criticism and indiscipline.

And he was famously quoted as saying that “rebellion (in his army) can be forgiven but not rewarded”. Rebels such as Riek Machar, Lam Akol and Kiir himself, were forced to return to Garang’s fold without any concession to their original complaints for rebelling.

Garang was thus acting as the famous Banyan tree, under which other seedlings are smothered and cannot grow. When death took him away in the late 2005, his ‘children’ were left as orphans, bereft of any knowledge of leadership skills and statecraft; not unlike those in the ‘Lords of the Flies’.

The conclave that sat to choose a successor to Garang selected Salva Kiir, knowing very well that he was the least qualified and the least able candidate. Their choice was dictated by juvenile selfishness, thinking they would be able to manipulate him much more easily than they were able to do with the haughty Garang. They could not have predicted the disaster that Kiir would become.

On ascending the throne, Kiir quickly surrounded himself with advisors whom he chose from among his own tribe mates.

Now known as the Jieng Council of Elders (JCE), these advisors decided on one thing: that Kiir must remain in power indefinitely and for this to happen, he must become a dictator.

It was the process of turning Kiir into a dictator that precipitated the power struggle, which like the case in the ‘Lord of the Flies, has led to the conflagration that has engulfed and is consuming our country.

The leading stoker of this firestorm is Paul Malong, who until recently, the Chief of Staff of the SPLA. He mobilized and recruited Dinka youth from his home in Bahr el Ghazal region into a horde of primitive militia that has burnt homes, raped and killed their owners and sent millions into refugee and IDP camps. He was the Roger of the ‘Lord of the Flies’.

Adults in the form of UN officials, UNMISS, US, UK, and Norwegian envoys have constantly stepped on the scene to restrain Kiir and Malong and others from burning down this island known as South Sudan, but to no avail.

Of late, Kiir and the JCE have come to note that their ship named the ‘SPLA’ is listing very badly and to save their skin, they have thrown overboard the man who saved his (Kiir’s) bacon, Paul Malong.

In a swift follow-up, Kiir and his advisors have re-baptized their ship, South Sudan Defense Force, the SSDF.

All these attempts at salvage will not fool anybody. Kiir and his advisors are not seven-year old children playing with fire and petrol in South Sudan. They are conscious adults who are clearly aware of their responsibility in causing genocide in our country.

Therefore, this article, despite its use of William Golding’s book as an allegory, disavows any notion of excusing the horrendous crimes committed by Kiir and his JCE. They must be held accountable and tried by the International Criminal Court (ICC) at The Hague.

Samuel Atabi is a concerned South Sudanese and can be reached at: samuelatabi@gmail.com

INSIDE STORY: Why Kiir Sacked Malong & the Failed Assassination of Taban Deng

By: Dickens H Okello, CHIMPREPORTS, May/14/2017, SSN;

The attack on the convoy of First Vice President Taban Deng on Tuesday on its way to Bor was a planned assassination to frame army Chief Gen. Paul Malong, arrest and kill him in a staged rescue.

Trouble between President Kiir, Malong and Intelligence Chief, Akol Koor stemmed from plans to deploy SPLA in Bor.

The sacking of SPLA Chief of General Staff, Gen. Paul Malong on Tuesday evening was expected but also an audacious move by President Salva Kiir.

Since his appointment during the height of internal war in South Sudan in early 2014, Malong became so powerful in the army, trimming the influence of then Defense Minister Kuol Manyang Juk.

It is widely believed that Malong was positioning himself to succeed Kiir due to his vast influence in the army.

Malong’s influence has undoubtedly been a challenge to those near the president and definitely Kiir himself.

This investigative website received and has been corroborating reports from intelligence sources in South Sudan and the region since Tuesday night.

Genesis of the trouble

According to a source at the National Intelligence and Security Service, the insecurity in Bor over tribal struggle between Murle community and Jonglei youths, caused disharmony between Kiir and Malong.

President Kiir reportedly issued a memo ordering the deployment of SPLA in Bor since Jonglei youths had refused to withdraw from Murle tribe territory.

Malong ignored the order and instead asked Kiir and the Director of National Intelligence Security Service in charge of Internal Security Bureau, Lt. Gen. Akol Koor Kuch to leave the matter to him.

A crisis meeting was immediately called by the president at the presidential palace commonly known as J1.

The meeting became so hot, generating serious verbal exchanges between Malong and Akol as Kiir watched them in disbelief.

Malong reportedly picked his small stick from the table and hit Akol on the shoulder though the aim was his head.

The meeting then ended without a resolution.

Assassination plot

After the open show of arrogance and power by Malong, a general in the National Intelligence and Security Service (NISS) was reportedly given orders from “above” to “handle” the belligerent army chief.

We have withheld the name of the NISS general for security reasons.

The visit of the First Vice President, Gen. Taban Deng to the same area (Bor) was due and hence the great opportunity to also get Malong.

The NISS strategists and operatives quickly arranged a plot to take out Taban Deng in a planned shootout and immediately release a report blaming Malong for the incident.

Malong would later be arrested and detained for killing the First Vice President.

A choreographed rescue attempt by the pro government militia, Mathiang Anyor who were largely recruited and trained by Malong, would happen, spark a deadly shootout and the latter shot in the struggle.

Malong reportedly got the intelligence and tried his best to foil the assassination.

“He was lucky to get the intel before its execution. I think it’s beyond luck,” a source in NISS told ChimpReports.

On Tuesday morning at exactly 10:00am, the convoy of Taban Deng moving to Bor was attacked between Tameza and Sudan Safari area.

The official report from government said 3 bodyguards were wounded but according to sources about 2 dozen soldiers lost their lives.

“Bodies were littered everywhere. There was serious blood bath in about a football field (area),” the source who reached the scene some minutes after the attack said.

“It was a short lethal combat exchange. The attackers disappeared without a trace and no one was picked.”

Taban Deng on Tuesday didn’t use his convoy but instead took a plane to Bor. The change in the plan was reportedly made Tuesday early morning.

Meanwhile, Malong had started ferrying arms from the army headquarters in Bilpam, Juba to his home area in Aweil, immediately he got the intelligence to terminate his life.

The armory in Bilpam is now said to be “almost empty”.

“Guns have moved from Bilpam to Aweil. It’s a difficult situation for Kiir now,” a source at army headquarters said.

Malong left Juba on Wednesday early morning without handing over to his successor or communicating to Kiir.

Kiir confirmed in a press conference at J1 on Thursday that he had to initiate communication with Malong and ask him to return to Juba.

“Personally, I am communicating with the former Chief of Staff, General Malong,” Kiir said.

Succession

The original 3 allies of Kiir who were believed to succeed him after his departure are former Foreign Affairs Minister, Nhial Deng, Malong and Akol Koor.

Since December when Malong’s influence became a source of tension in the Juba regime, the succession talks zeroed on Nhial Deng and Akol.

It is now largely believed that Kiir wants the intelligence chief, Akol Koor to succeed him and he has been the first general to openly talk bad about Malong after latter’s sacking.